Last month we were all shocked to learn of the heist at Brussels Airport, in which an armed gang breached the perimeter fence and stole GB pound 30 million (US$45 million) in diamonds from the runway, as the cargo was being transported from a Swiss-bound Helvetic Airways plane.
Thankfully no one was hurt, but the longer-term damage to the reputation of the airport remains to be seen.
This incident is a stark reminder to airports around the world that, while major incidents are rare, they do happen, and when they do you need to be well prepared to act at that decisive moment.
I cannot comment on the specific systems, infrastructure, and processes that are in place in Brussels, although it was reported that in 2001 it pioneered IP video by installing what was then the largest system in Europe, but airports in general have been some of the early adopters of the very latest safety and security technologies (especially since 9/11).
They have invested millions in state-of-the-art communications, IP-based surveillance cameras, alarms and detectors, video analytics, access control, biometrics, intrusion detection, ANPR, etc.
All of these systems, alongside the teams on the ground, in the control room, and working in the emergency services, are vital to protecting the infrastructure and people in and around the airport.
Security information overload
However, the turn of events in Brussels is a timely reminder to all involved in the safety, security, and broader operations at airports large and small around the world to look at the systems and processes which are in place and ask if such a situation occurred now, how well equipped would they be to react.
The truth is that all of the technology investments may not deliver the heightened standards of security if the control rooms into which all of the data feeds are being pumped are suffering from information overload.
LAX airport in Los Angeles was one of the first airports to address this issue when it opened its Airport Response Coordination Centre in 2011.
The airport introduced a situational awareness solution — an advanced PSIM (Physical Security Information Management) — that brings the data from all of its systems and sub-systems together to provide the control room with a single clear picture of what is happening across the airport estate in real-time.
Guidance on dealing with emergencies
An advanced PSIM solution such as this not only shows what is going on in the terminal, the gates, concourses, around the perimeter, the hangers, offices and warehouse buildings, but it also provides the team with step-by-step guidance as to how to respond to every incident in accordance with pre-determined best-practice and in accordance with industry regulations.
So, whether it is a queue building up at passport control due to a faulty machine, a fire alarm, an emergency landing, or a vehicle breaching the perimeter, the operator is aware, is presented with the necessary information, and knows what to do and when to coordinate a response.
Since LAX introduced a situational awareness solution, many other airports have followed suit, such as the much smaller New Orleans International Airport, which has incorporated more than 90 standard operating procedures using the solution.
Today’s airports have never been safer or more secure, but the incident in Brussels serves as an important reminder that we must look at every safety and security measure, uncover the weak spots, and continue to improve.
However, the final word goes to Jim Swire whose daughter was killed in the Lockerbie bomb disaster in 1988. He wrote in the Guardian on 21 February 2013:
Surely these days we could have immediate central security warning of perimeter breaches, with automatic “lock down” of the airport including all outgoing flights, till the cause is discovered.
The physical access control market is moving fast. Find out where you stand with the latest edition of IFSEC Insider's comprehensive 2022 State of Physical Access Control trend report, covering all the latest developments within the market. We assess the current technology in use, upgrade plans and challenges, and major trends on the horizon after receiving the views of over 1000 security, facilities and IT professionals.
Get your copy for free today.
Brussels Diamond Heist is a matter of great concern for air port security managements across the world. The culprits have adopted an innovative way to pick up the diamonds and make their escape good. I believe there would have definately been an insider’s involvement in this heist. Now, security administrative staff would have to think from different dimesion to protect these invaluable cargo consignments. It’s true that most of the security parameters are focusing on counter terrorism which indicates that high value thefts are overlooked by the management. I think there is requirement of all rounded approach to render fool… Read more »
Great article Jamie, totally agree. Any integrated system has to remove the clutter and present information by exception along with a clear response plan otherwise you have just installed an excellent post event analyser! The operational requirement has to be clearly defined as sometimes it is easy to install the latest gadgets just because its new and cutting edge rather than thinking through how it would benefit the security solution against your specific threats. The other area I also see as sometimes the poor relation is physical security especially when it is layered to delay the detected intrusion to allow… Read more »
Tony I think the security agencies are to look from a proactive point of view. The culprits nevertheless always come up with some thing new and novice. I think it will difficult to predict the very next move and how that will unfold till the time expertise are gained in reading the mind and behaviour of persons involved. I think counter terrorism must include the behavioural study as well to act proactively. Enhancing the security will always be there.
I think as far as just reading the news stories and hearing about the heist the proactive side was a bit lacking. The largest IP camera system is as much a reactive tool as it is a way to catch problems before they get out of control. Since they cut through a fence and headed for a service area unless you’re watching every foot of fencing around the airport it’s hard to be proactive in that case. Once they made it to the service area though there were probably a lot of opportunities for security to be a bit tighter… Read more »
This heist is the stuff movies are made of, except that there was no suspense. It went off so smoothly! I too think there was an insider component, where the security was “compromised” at just the right moment. How can they not have been seen?
anything possible this days, but I think you are right it look like inside job… as with new security cameras you must be at control to know dead area/corners also the pattern/rotation timing…
from my old days… crimes do come in waves… criminals do share/exchange info about easy marks/targets… also few other factors like for example – ex-military always plan ahead and e.t.
“criminals do share/exchange info about easy marks/targets”
@Alexander Stephens: Do you seriously think that they share information? I don’t think so since if they do, then they are opening the doors for others to get them red-handed.
yes, they do, it all depends on the group, like let say Eastern Europian crime rings do share the info and knowledge… from old school to new school… “Vorye v Zakone”
@Alexander Stephens: How can it be ?? Its not legal..
yes, it not legal on paper… but in Russia “Vory v zakone” thefs in law treated like royalty… it sad but it reality…
@Alexander Stephens: Thats bad since if things are not working on legal terms, there is a risk of things might not work as expected in the longer run.
Seems odd that, given what Jamie said correctly about airports having some of the most advanced security systems in the world, and being massively early adopters, that this heist went off without a single hitch. Would a PSIM deployment have helped? Maybe, maybe not, we’ll never know. @Stephen Spiegel your theory of there being an insider seems pretty valid, therefore…
yes, but you are dealing with people who is not normal so to say… and they do not follow normal rules…
@Alexander Stephens: No one follows normal rules. We should make sure that they follow something appropriate which matches the requirement. Then its fine for us.
myself, two things – I follow Bible way and put my trust in Official Canada Head of State her Majesty…- Long Live the Queen… How I see it order of things 🙂
@Alexander Stephens: Good way to follow thoughJ. Anyway it differs from person to person since the way people think is different
yes, thank you, No offence to anyone as we are have difrn. belives…
But surely the airport had permieter detection? Most airports have an underground system that detects when someone crosses it. No need for above-ground fences (apart from the obvious actual need for above-ground fences of course)
@Alexander Stephens: Exactly mate since everyone thinks differently and that is why there are so many opinions around, which sometimes makes dizzy to think which one is correct.
yes, but at https://www.ifsecglobal.com/ we are here to learn from each other via exchanging ideas/opinions/knowledge… if look at the other blogs we learn from Rob and Rob learn from us… – let ask Rob, do you agree Rob?
Given the size and age of many larger airports it wouldn’t surprise me if they didn’t have great perimeter detection in some areas. I know that the airport closest to me has sections of property miles away from the main terminals/runways and I can’t imagine that all of that fence line is monitored in any manner. I’m sure that once you get closer to the more sensitive areas like runways that it is monitored but if the thieves knew what they were doing I’m sure they also knew what areas to avoid.
safeNsane I agree with you. I think people with some wrong notions will first do their research what and where and then they will practically follow that and if we think that they will not be in knowledge then I hope we are sadly mistaken.
Certainly true that airports cover a vast area, and correspondingly the security could be less tight the further you get from the main runway/terminal areas.
I’m delighted to learn from other people all the time, yes, Batye! And whether anyone learns anything from me I don’t know, but I’m certainly here to ask questions.
I always forget the Queen is Canada’s head of state still. She doesn’t have any real powers, presumably, though?
thank you, Rob, trust me each member could learn a lot from you and each other… in some eastern ideas – each humans like a galaxy and galaxy have infinite amount of information… you see my point 🙂
God Save the Queen!!!
Rob, for my family her MAJESTY have true power 🙂 given by the Lord… I could not say the same for the rest of my fellow Canadians… but I do hope one day her MAJESTY will come to Canada and give Corporal punishment to some Senators in CANADIAN SENATE
ps: my wife is UK citizen…:) and British Subject by Birth… 🙂
We only send her on peaceful missions these days!
I think the second part of the equation is that emphasis has been on watching for terrorist actions not large scale theft so guys poking around looking for places to intercept packages probably wasn’t taken as seriously as someone trying to put a package onto a plane.
yes, Rob, this is there the problem… as if Canadian Senators know – Queen is comming with the stick… they would not be spending taxpayers money free for all…:(
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/05/28/senate_expenses_scandal
_harpers_exchief_of_staff_nigel_wright_says_he_made_some_mistakes.html
I trust you are right… as everyone was looking for items comming in… missing the things right before them… part of the human nature…
The landscape has changed greatly in security and monitoring in the past 10 years or so. I remember when the biggest concern a company had was someone breaking in and stealing office equipment or employees stealing company assets. Now even in the safest work environments I see an emphasis on keeping employees safe from external threats like disgruntled ex-employees. I’m sure we’ll swing back to a middle ground eventually but as long as we’re focused on one aspect we will tend to miss the warning signs of things we haven’t listed at the top priority.
yes, you are right, and I trust it correct as things change work env. changes… security must follow this changes and try to plan ahead….